Jump to content

a different aspect of gay marraige

Recommended Posts

Well, I see Canada has dealt with this issue already too. I must admit I was surprised to learn that a decision by the Court can actually change the law. While I can see the dangers inherent in that, I can see the advantages as well. Since our judges aren't elected, they aren't influenced by political pressures as strongly.


Link to comment

Controversial talkshow host Howard Stern has been an advocate of gay marriage for many years. He's often said, "I don't see why gay people shouldn't be prevented from being as miserable as married straight couples."

I think the sad reality is, if we have the freedom to be treated the same as anybody else, it also means also have to suffer exactly the same way -- no worse and no better than any other couple.

I'm reminded of several widely-publicized palimony cases that have happened over the years (including Rock Hudson, Liberace, and a lot of less-famous people). Divorce is no fun, no matter what your sexual orientation.

I think in this case, if the couple wanted to, they could just rent a tiny apartment in Massachusetts for a year, claim that as a residence, and then do a legal divorce. The only other option I can think of would be to just sit in an attorney's office, sign a contract that splits up their assets fairly, and then agree to live separately (being divorced without the piece of paper). Maybe even write in that, when a legal divorce is finally allowed, they'll agree to get one immediately.

But there's always a chance for reconciliation. There's a lot of states that make the splitting couples get counselling for six months (or more) before a judge will issue the final papers. I think that even happened with Paul McCartney's recent $50M divorce, so I think it'd be fair to apply it to gay couples, too.

Link to comment

There's more to it than that, Pecman, as the article says. The one woman wants to be able to marry again, and can't without a divorce. Also, the unfair ways gays who can divorce are treated financially is horrific.

According to Trab's article, they do this a lot more fairly in Canada. A judge looks at it, says, "Hey, this ain't right," and voids the entire thing with a stroke of a pen. It didn't go into tax consequences, but they probably do that better, too.

A good question is, with Obama in office for the next eight years, is the federal government going to change it's stance on gay marriage?

It'll be very interesting to see how the California ballot initiative goes in November.


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...